[Osmf-talk] Possible vote on membership prerequisites

Tobias Knerr osm at tobias-knerr.de
Fri Oct 23 18:32:52 UTC 2020


On 23.10.20 18:31, Kathleen Lu wrote:
> wouldn't it be easier to set up a reoccurring donation mechanism in the
> website?

If there's not a lot of interest in a "supporter" membership tier – and
so far it looks like that may turn out to be the case – I agree that
reoccurring donations could be an easier way to achieve almost the same
result.

> 2. What is going to be you test criteria for membership?

I expect the criteria would resemble those for the active contributor
membership except for the number of days, and for the difference between
one-time vs. annual criteria.

> Can the board change the criteria at will?

My intention is that the criteria would be set once, based on input from
MWG and after a community consultation, and stay in place afterwards.

> I don't think it's reasonable for the board
> to impose a test without telling people ahead of time what the test will
> be, nor do I think it's reasonable for the board to be able to change
> that test after the vote. That would seem to be a bait and switch, and
> could lead to an abusive board barring membership to everyone except
> their friends 

Based on my reading of AoA §15, the board already has that power. Do you
interpret it differently?

Obviously, I would consider it outrageous for the board to suddenly
start rejecting applications for no good reason. The desire to use this
power responsively is why we'd be asking the members at the AGM if they
want the board to take the proposed step.

Hammering out the specifics with MWG is the same approach we used for
last year's vote that lead to active contributor membership. I believe
the results of that process are widely considered a success. But of
course, an alternative could be to put a specific proposal in front of
the membership. It could even take the form of a tiered vote – "require
X days of contributions", "... 2*X days ...", etc. Thoughts on that?

> 3. Are you going to retroactively scrutinize the memberships of all
> current members?

The AoA make it relatively easy for the board to reject membership
applications, but only allow expulsion of existing members under
specific circumstances ("if, in the board's reasonable opinion, that
person's conduct interferes or is likely to interfere with the
Foundation achieving one or more of its objects"). So under the
resolution as proposed, we would *not* have the power to retroactively
scrutinize existing memberships.

Should such a requirement have been place from the beginning? In my
opinion, yes. But striving for fairness should not stop us from making
improvements.

If there is a desire to retroactively apply the requirements to existing
members, though, I believe that can be achieved by changing the
termination rules in §17 of the AoA. I'm worried that might cause more
strife than it's worth, but I'm open to further arguments in favour of
the idea.



More information about the osmf-talk mailing list